salsafan Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 What are the benefits of that ? Cos wouldn't spending and statistics again be screwed a little. Is this a benefit inline with how the government wants to run itself, or really about how the people want to vote and get the government to run ? Two different concepts here. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 What are the benefits of that ? The benefits of having all constituencies roughly the same size should be self-evident; you get fairer elections. To take an extreme example, imagine Sheffield council being made up of four seats; three of them each representing one-third of Dore and Whirlow, and the other one covering all the rest of the city. It's a fairly safe bet that you'd see a Tory council, by three seats to one. However I'm not actually sure if you were replying to my post, or directly to the OP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salsafan Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 The benefits of having all constituencies roughly the same size should be self-evident; you get fairer elections. To take an extreme example, imagine Sheffield council being made up of four seats; three of them each representing one-third of Dore and Whirlow, and the other one covering all the rest of the city. It's a fairly safe bet that you'd see a Tory council, by three seats to one. However I'm not actually sure if you were replying to my post, or directly to the OP. Well, I guess I am asking the question openly... Thanks for responding. So, in terms of voting, it seems in theory, much fairer, but how does this affect any council spendings. i.e. which council gets what amount, and how will it be spent? Which council will support which idea, and how the spending will be done, and why etc. Take for example this region: Sheffield South West (Arbourthorne, Beauchief and Greenhill, Dore and Totley, Gleadless Valley, Graves Park, Nether Edge) I happen to live in S2. I also happen to recall Mr Clegg being a representative from this region, and I also happen to remember what he was promoting was pretty moot. Of irrelevance to what I wanted as a voter. I can see that Arbourthorne being lumped with Dore, Totley, Beauchief means that, the standard of living will increase, and council taxes will also increase too! Yet, what I want is a more socialistic kind of living, which is currently what happens around the S2 area? This will get squished by those living in Dore and Totley won't it, as they are more capitalistic in mind. How exactly will it be fairer? Cos the majority will squish the minorities' idea, and yes, in theory, the majority will be elected in, and therefore they can do what they like and bulldoze over the rest. Even though in theory, from the top down, the idea seems well, but from bottom looking up to the top. The bottom of the pyramid (citizens) are affected even more so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 So, in terms of voting, it seems in theory, much fairer, but how does this affect any council spendings. i.e. which council gets what amount, and how will it be spent? Which council will support which idea, and how the spending will be done, and why etc. In theory, it shouldn't. What will happen in practice is anybody's guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Initial maps here http://mdfs.net/per13/ I'll go into more detail when I get home from work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 The biggest factor is trying to make all constituencies roughly the same size. They'll also keep sensible local boundaries as much as they can consistent with that aim. No, and I keep shouting at the radio about this, the biggest factor is to reduce the number of seats. Boundary reviews **ALWAYS** have to get seats equally-sized, the whole point of this review is to REDUCE the number of seats. The fact that the new seats have to be equally-sized is an automatic consequence of representnative democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JHJ21 Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 The new rules are quite strict and difficult to work with, but my initial reaction is that they could almost certainly have done better if they'd been prepared to split some wards. That way they could have avoided ideas like putting half of Darton (the other side of Barnsley) in the same constituency as Firth Park. jgharston: are you going to produce alternative proposals again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharston Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 jgharston: are you going to produce alternative proposals again?Yes, I've got some initial drafts on paper at home, all based on putting exactly five seats all within Sheffield and not spilling out over Sheffield's borders. Of course, arranging 28 wards into 5 groups neccessitates carefully splitting some wards, and most of my draft notes provide several options for doing this in a minimally-impacting way respecting community groupings well. An example off the top of my head (I'm at work, so can't check my notes), Crookes Ward easily splits into Crookes and Crosspool; Shirecliffe easily peels off the top edge of Burngreave Ward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 Given the 'need' to reduce the number of constituencies, the exercise involves sorting the 28 Council wards into sets so that the electorate of each fits the Boundary Commission's maximum and minimum rules. I'd prefer to have five Sheffield-only ones, rather than four such plus bits of two others; I agree with jgharston on this. However, the BC must steer clear of gerrymandering by politicians seeking to juggle the wards for party advantage. If I had a role in the exercise, I'd suggest trying to achieve a Sheffield South-West constituency with some community of interest. It could embrace parts of three of those shown in post #1- i.e.: a. Broomhill and Walkley**; b. Crookes, Ecclesall, and Fulwood; and c. Dore/Totley and Nether Edge. ** or omit Walkley if this scheme would have too many electors. Plus maybe the distribution of voters into the 28 wards also needs equalising. In turn, each ward comprises polling districts (ditto). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffrey Shaw Posted September 13, 2011 Share Posted September 13, 2011 The BBC website link for constituencies in 'Yorkshire and The Humber' [ugh!] is defective; it leads only to those in S.E.England! Instead, use the Boundary Commission's own: http://rr-bce-static.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/2011_09_09_BCE_YorkshireHumberIP_acc2.pdf?9d7bd4 From it, I have extracted that every constituency – apart from two specified exceptions – must have an electorate that is no smaller than 72,810 and no larger than 80,473. I've organised the following data (wards and electorates): Arbourthorne Sheffield 12,551 Beauchief and Greenhill Sheffield 13,530 Beighton Sheffield 13,239 Birley Sheffield 12,898 Broomhill Sheffield 12,974 Burngreave Sheffield 14,765 Central Sheffield 17,646 Crookes Sheffield 13,702 Darnall Sheffield 14,711 Dore and Totley Sheffield 13,477 East Ecclesfield Sheffield 14,464 Ecclesall Sheffield 14,647 Firth Park Sheffield 13,566 Fulwood Sheffield 14,047 Gleadless Valley Sheffield 13,882 Graves Park Sheffield 13,346 Hillsborough Sheffield 13,569 Manor Castle Sheffield 12,134 Mosborough Sheffield 13,595 Nether Edge Sheffield 13,004 Richmond Sheffield 13,123 Shiregreen and Brightside Sheffield 13,787 Southey Sheffield 13,519 Stannington Sheffield 14,159 Stocksbridge and Upper Don Sheffield 14,576 Walkley Sheffield 14,217 West Ecclesfield Sheffield 14,035 Woodhouse Sheffield 13,349 So now off you go- a game for all the family! Sort those into five equalish sets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.